Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/intels-mobileye-plans-to-offer-41-million-shares-in-ipo-at-18-21-each.16876/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021270
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Intel's Mobileye Plans to Offer 41 Million Shares in IPO at $18-$21 Each

hist78

Well-known member
This new $15 billion valuation is much smaller than the original $40 to $50 billion estimate.

"Intel Corp.'s self-driving-car unit, Mobileye Global Inc., expects a market valuation of roughly $15 billion at the projected pricing midpoint of its initial public offering."

 

nghanayem

Well-known member
This new $15 billion valuation is much smaller than the original $40 to $50 billion estimate.

"Intel Corp.'s self-driving-car unit, Mobileye Global Inc., expects a market valuation of roughly $15 billion at the projected pricing midpoint of its initial public offering."

This definitely isn't the market intel would like this to happen in and intel is more desperate for the money than they would have liked
 

blueone

Well-known member
That's roughly what Intel paid for Mobileye 5 years ago, and a huge cut from the initial $50b Intel was looking for.
I read (I can't remember where) that Intel is probably pricing the IPO at a bargain level so investors bid the share price up, and the market would determine the real price. I suspect Intel might like this strategy because they're holding on to a controlling number of shares. This might mean there's not consensus among Intel's board and the advisors it's using from investment banks on what the IPO price should be.
 

hist78

Well-known member
I read (I can't remember where) that Intel is probably pricing the IPO at a bargain level so investors bid the share price up, and the market would determine the real price. I suspect Intel might like this strategy because they're holding on to a controlling number of shares. This might mean there's not consensus among Intel's board and the advisors it's using from investment banks on what the IPO price should be.

This is a half-hearted IPO with Intel controlling 99% of the voting power after the IPO. It's like the public are invited to buy tickets for a New Year party but they need to wait by the curbside for a chance to get into the party.

"Intel will retain a large stake in Mobileye, including all of the class B shares Mobileye plans to issue, with each B share having voting rights equivalent to 10 A shares. Immediately following the completion of the offering, Intel's hold on the B shares is expected to represent a little over 99% of the voting power, according to the prospectus."
 

blueone

Well-known member
This is a half-hearted IPO with Intel controlling 99% of the voting power after the IPO. It's like the public are invited to buy tickets for a New Year party but they need to wait by the curbside for a chance to get into the party.

"Intel will retain a large stake in Mobileye, including all of the class B shares Mobileye plans to issue, with each B share having voting rights equivalent to 10 A shares. Immediately following the completion of the offering, Intel's hold on the B shares is expected to represent a little over 99% of the voting power, according to the prospectus."
I agree, but look at where the former CEO of VMware gets his ideas from...
 

hyb5089

New member
Its hovering in the $28 to $29 range as of now. Considering the macro situation, if Mobileye had IPOed near the peak of the market it would potentially have a similar or lower valuation than now considering the hypergrowth stocks have been hammered to the tune of 80-90%. Of course this doesn't consider that Intel only sold 5% of the shares whereas selling 59% at the peak would have raised 25 billion
 

count

Well-known member
Mobileye is trading at a $23b valuation. I suspected it would ultimately be around a $20b valuation, but there is a pretty high bar for growth even at this current valuation. Time will tell.
 

nghanayem

Well-known member
Mobileye is trading at a $23b valuation. I suspected it would ultimately be around a $20b valuation, but there is a pretty high bar for growth even at this current valuation. Time will tell.
This leads to a growth rate of 8.3% per year over the 5 years since intel has purchased MBLY. After adjusting for inflation intel's investment has grown 4%. Not the typical rate of return that silicon valley folks are probably used to, but there is a good chance this is better growth than intel can reasonably expect from it's normal safe investments given their status as a market leader with minimal opportunities for growth (although it is probably a good bit below their MARR which is likely higher to compensate for the uncertainty present with any investment).
 

blueone

Well-known member
The future of the mobile eye depends on how fast autonomous vehicles leave death valley. It seems that subtle issues are yet to be detected and theorized-let alone automated them. I look forward to sharing views. https://www.the-waves.org/2020/07/31/autonomous-vehicles-in-death-valley/
If Ford is to be believed, autonomous vehicles look a lot longer to develop than they thought. So much so they just booked a $2.7B loss on their Argo AI investment. Drove Ford from a profit last quarter to a loss. I agree with Ford. The way forward are driver assists.

 
Last edited:

nghanayem

Well-known member
If Ford is to be believed, autonomous vehicles look a lot longer away than they thought. So much so they just booked a $2.7B loss on their Argo AI investment. Drove Ford from a profit last quarter to a loss. I agree with Ford. The way forward are driver assists.

I suppose that is good for Mobileye investors since they are a leader in this segment. However does this really matter either way? Because even if you aren't using Mobileye's self driving models/software, won't customers continue to use more sensors and data processors from mobileye, and then feed them into X companies neural engine?
 

blueone

Well-known member
I suppose that is good for Mobileye investors since they are a leader in this segment. However does this really matter either way? Because even if you aren't using Mobileye's self driving models/software, won't customers continue to use more sensors and data processors from mobileye, and then feed them into X companies neural engine?
My personal opinion on autonomous driving, for about the past seven years, has been that it is unlikely to become more than a very sophisticated driver assistance system for a long time. I had (and still have) the opinion that ADAS would win in the long run, and get more and more sophisticated over time. This made me very unpopular with some colleagues working on autonomous driving projects, to say the least. I was of the opinion that most people are such lousy drivers that ADAS, as it matures, would be a huge safety win, but humans would still need to drive.

The question is about Mobileye whether their ADAS technology is cost-effective enough to compete in anything except low-volume high-end luxury cars. I'm not sure; it looks like a derivative of autonomous driving technology, and it looks like a big integrated proprietary solution. That also fits in with a quote from their CEO on their website. I wonder... are vehicle manufacturers willing to design their control systems around one proprietary technology source like Mobileye, or will they demand more distributed systems with open and interoperable interfaces? Based on my experience with complex technologies for the datacenter industry, I have doubts about the long-term viability of integrated proprietary solutions.
 

nghanayem

Well-known member
My personal opinion on autonomous driving, for about the past seven years, has been that it is unlikely to become more than a very sophisticated driver assistance system for a long time. I had (and still have) the opinion that ADAS would win in the long run, and get more and more sophisticated over time. This made me very unpopular with some colleagues working on autonomous driving projects, to say the least. I was of the opinion that most people are such lousy drivers that ADAS, as it matures, would be a huge safety win, but humans would still need to drive.

The question is about Mobileye whether their ADAS technology is cost-effective enough to compete in anything except low-volume high-end luxury cars. I'm not sure; it looks like a derivative of autonomous driving technology, and it looks like a big integrated proprietary solution. That also fits in with a quote from their CEO on their website. I wonder... are vehicle manufacturers willing to design their control systems around one proprietary technology source like Mobileye, or will they demand more distributed systems with open and interoperable interfaces? Based on my experience with complex technologies for the datacenter industry, I have doubts about the long-term viability of integrated proprietary solutions.
I thought mobileye was the largest producer of automatic emergency braking systems, and had contracts with almost every automotive company? If that isn't the case then I retract my statement.

Update:
Their tech is in supercruise, older versions of autopilot, volvo/Geely, Fords, VW/Audi, BMW, Nissan, and apparently in 2021 Toyota selected them to dual source with a German company for Toyota's upcoming platforms.

As for the ADAS systems I wouldn't mind that. Autonomous for boring/easy highway driving that people often lose focus during and to help avoid/minimize an accident. If you could get it advanced enough it could probably solve like 90% of accidents that aren't DUIs.
 
Last edited:

blueone

Well-known member
I thought mobileye was the largest producer of automatic emergency braking systems, and had contracts with almost every automotive company? If that isn't the case then I retract my statement.
I haven't seen definitive marketshare information for the ADAS industry. See the companies profiled in this report:


Mobileye is the only one I'm aware of that focuses on a vertical solution, so perhaps I was coloring the data with my doubts about that strategy.
 

nghanayem

Well-known member
I haven't seen definitive marketshare information for the ADAS industry. See the companies profiled in this report:


Mobileye is the only one I'm aware of that focuses on a vertical solution, so perhaps I was coloring the data with my doubts about that strategy.
My understanding is their ADAS systems are plug and play, but the vertical integration comes into play with their autonomous driving solutions where they are slapping together their sensors and signal processors with their software.
 
Top